skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Today’s youth are more proactive with their identities these days than we were.

I wanted to echo this and say that I believe younger people create a "symphony" with their identity; picking and choosing from various sub-cultures to create a unique combination. Flexible, morphing.
The basic problem is that if the compiler handles your code in an unusual way in the benchmark, you haven't really measured the two implementations against each other, you've measured something different.

Dead code elimination is the most obvious way this happens, but you can also have issues where you give the branch predictor "help", or you can use a different number of implementations of a method so you get different inlining behavior (this can make a benchmark better or worse than reality), and many others.

As for runtime, if you're creating a library, you probably care at least a little bit about alternate runtimes, though you may well just target node/V8 (on the JVM, I've done limited benchmarking on runtimes other than HotSpot, though if any of my projects get more traction, I'd anticipate needing to do more).
Probably. But frankly I don't care, because that's irrelevant. Plastic pollution is global.
As a cancer researcher myself, I'd point out that some branches of the decision trees in the NCCN guidelines are based on studies in which multiple options were not statistically significantly different, but all were better than the placebo. In those cases, the clinician is free to use other factors to decide which arm to take. A classic example of this is surgery vs radiation for prostate cancer. Both are roughly equally effective, but very different experiences.
Early computer networks appeared in the 1960s and the public internet as we know it in the 1990s.

We are still early in AI.
Well, there are good arguments that free trade is not always a good thing, especially when there exists actors (e.g. corporations) who are the main beneficiary of the differential in economies to extract more profits. Free trade implies YOU getting a cheaper price sometimes, but it also implies that SOME workers will no longer have jobs due to their inability to compete on a global market.

The limiting case is telling: an alien race comes and offers all of our goods for 1/10th of their Earth price, made possible by their insanely advanced technology. Is that a good thing?
Play sports, and it becomes much easier.
Thank you for having morals.

I find it's really interesting how many comments opinions like this get on reddit and HN. It almost feels like there are orgs similar to marketing firms that get paid to promote zionism on the internet...
The future might just be to remove the regulations again and enjoy cheap chocolate. What other countries do with their trees is not my problem.
Gen Z uses a lot more steroids which tracks with your analysis.

But also I think you're falling for sample bias. The ones who don't have a billion followers are overweight and generally less healthy than previous generations.
> My personal rule of thumb is that rents remain fairly stable as a proportion of earnings

This is the problem, because supply is artificially constrains if wages double (through efficiencies), rents increase to soak up the extra productivity.
No it does not.

(Source: I'm European 4 dan. I wipe the go board with weaker players playing whatever unconventional moves they like. Likewise, I get crushed by stronger players, faster than usual if I choose unusual moves. This might work on like the double-digit kyu level...)
Well, that does not apply to future Go AIs for all of time.
There is a book about it, called PSI. They started it because the Soviets also leaked info that their telepathy program, necessary for submarine comms, was successful. Also their aura viewer and what else.

So they assembled a team of scientists and psychics and learned that the success rate resembled the random sample. Some psychics were also good magicians and scammers
The goal is admirable, but consumer-grade LLMs don’t seem like they are capable of this kind of task.
The Channel Tunnel is unique in Europe for being a long, undersea tunnel.

No other train in Britain or France has security checks.
That sounds like a gigantic pile of rationalization for why proof is unobtainable. It sounds a lot like my religious school teachers telling us about “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.” This powerful being is totally real and definitely takes visible actions in the world but don’t try to check this fact because it stops working if you try to check it.

Tons of human abilities are affected by our belief in them. Medicine is more effective when the patient believes it’s effective, to the extent that pills with no medicine in them can still have an effect if the patient believes it will. Do we just throw up our hands and say, crap, it’s super hard to figure out of any of this medicine actually works? No, we sit down and design experiments that account for it and end up with a massive library of proven drugs.

We don’t dismiss this stuff because it’s controversial and seems incompatible with a materialist worldview. We dismiss it because there’s no good evidence for it and no proposed method of action despite decades of trying. Arguably millennia of trying; “remote viewing” and similar things are just new framings of ancient religious ideas. There’s no actual difference between attempting “remote viewing” and praying for a vision.

And sure, it’s possible this stuff is real. But when there’s no conclusive demonstration of it after thousands of years, the burden of proof is firmly on the people who think it’s real, and it is definitely not the job of the rest of us to take this stuff seriously.
Does Google make money from code reviews?

The web store mainly serves as a payment gateway.
he's slowly building his army that will conquer all the computers in the world.
Some of our neutral networks learned ladders. You forgot the "a" standing for artificial. Even so amended, "never"? Good luck betting on that belief.
This has been my standpoint though I'm not against regulation. Am I expected to vet every supply chain for everything that I buy? Sounds ridiculous. Let other countries and regulators worry about it.
In Maine, remote jobs give prisoners a lifeline
+1 I also want the author to live but more importantly I would really like to have his css system. Is it online?
PDFs are essentially compressed Postscript, which is Turing complete, so a PDF in theory can do anything you want.
> Sports, especially, are something that I have a very difficult time imagining enjoying

There is a wide range of sports :) My mom always tried to force me into team sports like football, hockey and alike, which never really was my thing. But as an adult, I enjoy things like skiing, water-sports, table-tennis and a bunch of other sports, that I see less like "sports" but more like "enjoyable activities", but also really makes it easy to meet people with similar interests :)
I came to California, in part, because my family in the Midwest is a bunch of Jesus freaks - not the "love thy neighbor" kind, more like the "God hates fags" kind. So when a girlfriend (in California) invited me to her church for some volunteer work, I went prepared to hate on everyone. However, I was blown away, as they were the nicest people I'd ever met in my life. They all went out of their way to help one another, just to be helpful, not to destroy the "gay agenda" or "save the unborn" or whatever. No one preached to me, no warnings about burning in hell.

My point is that, love it or hate it, church can be a great way to meet good people. I'm still anti-religion, anti-church, although a bit less. But I can't deny the social support church can provide.
- TOFU: Trust on first use (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_on_first_use)

- SSHFP: SSH FingerPrint record in the domain name system (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSHFP_record)

- MITM: Man in the middle (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack)
Whoa. Not surprised, though. Education has always been a tradeoff or balance between training children to be functional parts of industrial society and helping them understand their place in life (satiate their curiosity, etc.) As technology progresses forward and interacting with AI becomes more important than interacting with people, the balance will deteriorate.

This is nothing else than a reflection of how we are sacrificing our humanity for technological production.
Doesn't this seem like a tautological purpose? Our purpose is to create a new generation of beings who question their own purpose?
This looks cool

*bookmarks it in huge Trello list where cool bookmarks go to die*
> If the FBI is going to police crypto, we need to tax it.

Crypto is taxed like any other income or capital gains in the US.
Of course there are different environments. If you work in the public sector you won't be fired unless you break the law. If you work somewhere with a lot of investor money coming in, then your employment is not dependent on your productivity. As long as the money keeps coming in, you're safe. Once it stops, everybody is out, even the hardest workers.

And there's even good companies, where they will give a bad employee a chance to become better.

But in more everyday workplaces you first don't get hired unless you're productive, and you secondly get fired if you're not productive. When/if the boss comes around to threaten about working harder, it's almost always a scam, because if there really was any issue, you'd been fired already. This becomes less and less of an issue the better paid a job is, because at the higher levels people know well if they're good or not.
Is this true of farming in general? How much does the cost of a loaf of bread compare to price paid to the farmer for the wheat?
Yes, Slab and SlotMap are the next stop on this train, and ECS is the last stop. But a simple Vec can get you surprisingly far. Most small programs never really need to delete anything.
It was used as a sweetener at one time…
Not to worry, Trump will fix it --- by prohibiting the CDC from reporting the number of cases without political oversight and approval.

Stupid is as stupid does.
Auto racing? Even has telemetry.
AlphaGo was trained on many human positions, all of which contain numerous ladders.

I don't think anyone knows for sure, but ladders are very calculation heavy. Unlike a lot of positions where Go is played by so called instinct, a ladder switches modes into "If I do X opponent does Y so I do Z.....", almost chess like.

Except it's very easy because there are only 3 or 4 options per step and really only one of those options continues the ladder. So it's this position where a chess-like tree breaks out in the game of Go but far simpler.

You still need to play Go (determining the strength of the overall board and evaluate if the ladder is worth it or if ladder breaker moves are possible/reasonable). But for strictly the ladder it's a simple and somewhat tedious calculation lasting about 20 or so turns on the average.

--------

The thing about ladders is that no one actually plays out a ladder. They just sit there on the board because it's rare for it to play to both players advantages (ladders are sharp: they either favor white or black by significant margins).

So as, say Black, is losing the ladder, Black will NEVER play the ladder. But needs to remember that the ladder is there for the rest of the game.

A ladder breaker is when Black places a piece that maybe in 15 turns (or later) will win the ladder (often while accomplishing something else). So after a ladder breaker, Black is winning the ladder and White should never play the ladder.

So the threat of the ladder breaker changes the game and position severely in ways that can only be seen in the far far future, dozens or even a hundred turns from now. It's outside the realm of computer calculations but yet feasible for humans to understand the implications.
For me it went something like: I'm lonely > try to make friends > it's hard, but wait I already have friends > try to reconnect with old friends > for various reasons old friends don't want to/can't be friends > try to make new friends > wait I want my old friends > not going to happen > volunteering
> I have a hard time imagining computers would ever have a strong enough understanding of the human experience with mathematics to even begin pondering such questions unprompted, let alone answer them and grok the implications.

The key is that the good questions however come from hard-won experience, not lazily questioning an AI.
Do the users care?

I think they are used to waiting because they no longer know the speed of desktop applications.
Should companies competing in your economy be allowed to profit off cheap / illegal labor? That kind of labor makes labor in your economy uncompetitive
not a lawyer here but I suspect that exercising rights as a shareholder takes some legal education and some networking.. you are right that the DEFAULT stance is what is presented.. but somehow I dont think this the whole possible story in 2024
> Built in weather widget

Thanks. I figured, but boy, does this annoy me. Google, for example, refuses to show me the weather without location permission. I am perfectly capable of telling it where I want to see the weather, but it will not allow me to see any weather without a location permission. (Usually I think Samsung screws up their design decisions relative to Google, but they do get this one right.)

Similarly, it seems to me, a launcher does not need to share my location with a third party to request weather. It can simply request weather in, say, a ZIP code, and then, if it must, refine the results it presents to me based on my location. (Or, better, there must be some way for it to delegate weather requests to a weather app of my choice, and let the weather app figure out my location through whatever mechanism I have already approved for that app.)
Yes, you also get censored like crazy for speaking the truth. I don’t even think my upvotes work on this site anymore. I just upvoted your comment if it doesn’t show it.
NOTE: this is a july 2023 paper, the defense paper in september 2024 is https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12843
That's not how I read it. The comparison to AI comes at the end, written out literally.
Nordstrom is great for service!

You cannot go there and get bad service in my experience. Other department stores you will have to wait around, or go hunting for a sales associate who is likely so overwhelmed they can't really help you anyway.

Nordstroms keeps enough people around that you can frequently have what amounts to personal shopper service. Of course, you pay for it, but there are clearly consumers that are happy to pay that premium (myself included.

aside: I dated a girl who was missing one foot, and Nordstroms was rather famous in the amputee community for giving 50% discounts. Pretty slick PR move really.
Or gives the product away --- a certain shoe company's gifting of footwear destroys the business of local cobblers.
Such a shame it’s like this now because I played it extensively as a kid back in 06 and 07 and it helped inspire me to learn programming.
That's nice and all, but when you don't believe in their god, it becomes rather awkward.
I’ve found most of my new friends in my 50’s by going to little local museums that interest me, such as a small clock museum and a military history museum, and inserting myself into them by volunteering to help out.
I'll happily look at a benchmark which shows that the size of the index has any significant performance implications vs the work done with the data stored at said index, never mind the data actually stored there.

I haven't looked closely at the decompiled code but I wouldn't be surprised if iterating through a contiguous data structure has no cache pressure but is rather just incrementing a register without a load at all other than the first one.

And if you aren't iterating sequentially you are likely blowing the cache regardless purely based on jumping around in memory.

This is an optimisation that may be premature.

EDIT:

> Also indices are trivially serializable, which cannot be said for pointers

Pointers are literally 64bit ints... And converting them to an index is extremely quick if you want to store an offset instead when serialising.

I'm not sure if we are missing each other here. If you want an index then use indices. There is no performance difference when iterating through a data structure, there may be some for other operations but that has nothing to do with the fact they are pointers.

Back to the original parent that spurred this discussion... Replacing a reference (which is basically a pointer with some added suger) with an index into an array is effectively just using raw pointers to get around the borrow checker.
I am sometimes jealous of religious people. They have a clear vision of the meaning of life and churches give them a social group they can join.

Us atheists don’t really have something like that.
You could look at it that way. But C++ programs often use similar strategies, even though they don't have to. Array/Vec based layouts like this give you the option of doing some very fancy high-performance stuff, and they also happen to play nicely with the borrow checker.
We are translating language from a ton of other species. Now we can see that they are using names and probably sharing information.

The brightest minds now want to use machine learning to tease out more low level features of language itself, across various species.

We are already calling monkeys and elephants by their native names y'all... And they are responding to this...

Think about it... This research is unlikely to stall. We're barely scratching the surface. The animals were having more nuanced conversation than we thought. They've been doing this for millions of years...

Condescension toward nature... Usually a mistake. I'm not saying they are all philosophers, but it seems very likely they've been having some pretty advanced conversations surrounding their own affairs. If we can call them by their name... Probably we're going to unlock some pretty interesting communication.
Many private equity firms are perfectly happy to extract cash from viable businesses and bankrupt them. They have an asset, and they want to convert it to some other kind of asset. It often has very little to do with whether the business is failing.

Essentially, it's arbitrage. "Can be arbitraged" is not the same as failing. You can talk about things like "efficiency", but the problem with that is that the metric being used to measure efficiency is laughably simplistic - deliberately so, it's just a way to justify socially irresponsible behavior.
Always has been. Middlemen eat most of the margin. A bushel of wheat is cheaper than a fancy loaf of bread.
> Debugging is immeasurably more useful to understand and get to the root of the problem in a complex system

I try to write systems that aren't so complex that I need a debugger but get the same job done. And I choose not to work on systems already so complex that their usage is mandatory. I do not consider this a loss at all. Systems that I write can almost uniformly rebuild and rerun their tests in under a second. I can add (pretty) prints and see the results faster than I can switch to a different tab to run a debugger. I have never introduced or encountered a bug that required advanced debugging techniques besides getting a stacktrace from a crashing problem. YMMV.
The variation in taste is so weird and complicated that we use "a matter of taste" as a generic idiom.
It's unfortunate that this is the only takeaway of the article for you.
I had a data structures / algorithms professor in college who would occasionally ask us to write C++ by hand, on paper, during exams.

Syntax wasn't really graded, its forgivable to make trivial syntax errors on pen and paper. The questions never covered more than a few dozen lines of code. But doing it this way forced us to really actually hold an entire small problem in our heads instead of just whatever slice of it the IDE was helping us focus on at the time and I think developing some of that skillset ended up being hugely useful to me when I started my career and was jumping into codebases far larger than I'd ever navigated before.

Jump-to-definition and search for symbols in RubyMine/IDEA are some of my most used tools today, but I think I'd probably be a worse programmer if I never had to develop the skill of working without them to a certain extent. I'd encourage everyone to give it a shot next time you have a few minutes to sharpen the saw. Grab a yellow legal pad and write a little toy parser/lexer for a toy programming language you just invented.

FWIW: I also love printing out diffs for nontrivial code reviews and marking them up with pen and paper, particularly big SQL views.
Doesn't the board get filled up with stones? I could see how a go player might think a win is a win so it doesn't mater how many stones you win by, but I don;t see how you would go about delaying winning.
> And it's not clear why such a simple pattern is impossible for deep neural nets to figure out.

Maybe solving ladders is iterative?
Once they make chain-of-thought version of AlphaZero it might figure them out.
Cool examples, thanks! I haven't used Excel extensively, but I sometimes help at some company where the non-IT founder made complex set of Excel spreadsheets for various things and I rather not touch them at all.

I see too much chance to overwrite something I didn't mean to, or without noticing even. Contrary to Scripts those things are not reversible or reproducible ... I'm not sure if there is some log of changes in Excel.

So at the end, maybe really another reason to change the naming ... :p
Whatever fosters a good healthy community is good, and church does play a role but as you state it’s not always positive and healthy. It’s good to know they’re not a uniform monolith and if you don’t find one you like you should keep on looking.
Skill issue.

Plenty of atheists are capable of finding both meaning in life and social groups to join.
Go mentor a high school robotics team, or volunteer to help run events. It's 100% sports, minus the athletic dimension. I see tons of lifetime friendships being made.
(2022)...not that it matters

Dozens of sources are listed in the bibliography...yet parent/child interactions scarcely exist in the article's text.

Do philosophers never have children? Or is it required that they manipulate their spouses into handling all the child-care duties?
It existed at least: https://web.archive.org/web/20121218025312/http://www.reddit...
You have more generous eyes than my best, but saying things like, get off your butt, stop binging, and its that easy, is pretty analogous to common discourse where the blame is placed on motivation alone.
> 21% of Americans have experimented with consensual non-monogamy at some point in their lives

"Try a threeway once" fits the billed description of "experimented with consensual non-monogamy" pretty exactly.

Whether the people involved continue to define their relationship as non-monogamous is irrelevant.